Carr v. State, 81-587
| Decision Date | 20 October 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 81-587,81-587 |
| Citation | 421 So.2d 1098 |
| Parties | Angela CARR, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
The trial court having concluded that its order on motion to compel was not dispositive of the case, the appeal is dismissed. Pursuant to the procedure suggested in Gray v. State, 379 So.2d 435 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980), the trial court shall allow appellant thirty days from the date of this order within which to file a motion to withdraw her plea. The trial court shall grant such motion unless the state is able to establish prejudice as a result of the delay engendered by this appeal. Should appellant not be allowed to withdraw her plea, she may seek review of the order denying withdrawal by filing a new appeal in this court.
To continue reading
Request your trial
3 cases
-
Gomez v. State, 82-1584
...an appellate court find that it was not, and that, therefore, it was without jurisdiction over the appeal. See, e.g., Carr v. State, 421 So.2d 1098 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Coleman v. State, 417 So.2d 690 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Kjersgaard v. State, 383 So.2d 763 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980); Gray v. State,......
-
Head v. State, s. 91-00899
...decided in 1979, our supreme court revisited the issue of conditional nolo pleas when it took for review the case of Carr v. State, 421 So.2d 1098 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), and the court wrote, "[w]e agree and reiterate our holding in Brown: an issue is preserved for appeal on a nolo plea only i......
- Irani v. State, 81-1208